At least it's out in the open that this agreement [[and assurances) will be can-kicked to the next president!
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/...el-for-critics
From article:
"So essentially, we're purchasing for 13, 14, 15 years assurances that the breakout is at least a year — that — that if they decided to break the deal, kick out all the inspectors, break the seals and go for a bomb, we'd have over a year to respond," the president told NPR's Steve Inskeep.
If Iran doesn't follow Obama's plan. Let's bomb, bomb, bomb....bomb, bomb, Iran!
What plan???. If he'd have threatened to bomb, bomb, bomb before starting to "negotiate" he may have had an agreement by now, but all he's got is an agreement to have an agreement. Everything about this "negotiation" has been done from pathetic weakness: no cards up their sleeves or for that matter no sleeves. I guess he Hopes they'll Change. Time to introduce James Taylor to sing to them. All he's really interested in is that Iran doesn't use the bomb on his watch [[1.5 years) and screw the future Presidents.Quote:
Originally Posted by Danny
It was reported in European Press yesterday that Putin will sell S-300 Advanced Missile Systems to Iran. Do you think this is part of "The Plan"? They will need some way of delivering the bomb after Obama has left office.Quote:
Originally Posted by Danny
Went to do a test,Quote:
Originally Posted by Danny
The place was such a mess,
Found weapons grade Plutonium,
So the Air Force will do the rest......
Quote:
Originally Posted by coracle
So, what would you suggest he do?
i wish you'd have asked me before it got into this mess. The only avenue open now is to close on a "deal" that Congress will vote against and blame them for the failure; then leave it to the next President to sort it out and in the meantime pray to Allah it won't be Hillary [[and nobody makes a movie that upsets Muslims).Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick
Predictably, Mr. Netanyahu's paid lobbyists in the GOP have nothing positive to say about the agreement. There is little or no discussion of the fact that Pakistan, an extremist Islamic state, has hundreds of nuclear weapons. What will stop them from selling or losing a few that may end up in Iran? Wouldn't it be nice if politicians would consider what is best for America, rather than the president of a foreign state like Israel that has already attacked a US Naval ship in international waters? Is what's good for the military industrial complex necessarily what's good for America?
This is one of those rare occasions where I think Obama's instinct was correct. Embargoes, in themselves, are an act of hostility against a foreign country. The British embargoed the US a time or two and that was considered an act of war back then. The US embargoed Confederate states for the same reason. So Whatever Obama got out of the deal may have been a plus. I suspect it it is a weak agreement that Chamberlain would have been ashamed of but since the US doesn't have a right to conduct acts of war against Iran, even slowing down Iran's rush to have a bomb is probably a plus. Iran will soon be flooding the world with more oil which will be good for the world economy, although not the Saudi economy, in the short run. If we had just paid the asking price for middle eastern oil, perhaps we would have developed fracking and other oil avoiding technologies that much faster without all the wars.
These are the countries who negotiated the Iran agreement, [[the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council—United States, Russia, China, France, United Kingdom—plus Germany and the European Union).
Should the US back out, our sanctions alone will not force the end of the agreement. The other countries lifting their sanctions will accomplish Iran's main goal in agreeing to suspend its arms program and reduce its nuclear program.
We will be on the sidelines of the world as Iran is able to do business with other countries hungry for its oil.
I was intrigued by Iranian President Rouhani's offer to help fight Isis. Iran is just as much against Isis as anyone. Last September, he said this:
Well aware of its new position, Iran’s President Hassan Rouhani told the General Assembly on September 25 that Iran’s promises of help in the war against ISIS depended on Western concessions in the nuclear talks. “We are determined to continue our confidence-building approach and our transparency” in the nuclear negotiations, Rouhani said. “If our interlocutors are equally motivated and flexible,” then Iran and the West can start cooperating on “very important regional issues, such as combating violence and extremism.”
http://www.newsweek.com/iran-says-its-willing-fight-isis-price-273939
Meantime, Iran's military stands ready to fight Isis:
We all are prepared to go and destroy ISIS totally," one Basij commander told CNN. "If our Imam, our Supreme Leader orders us, we will destroy ISIS."
http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/22/middle...fighting-isis/
I expect good things to come from this agreement. Look at Cuba, already we are testing a lung cancer vaccine they have had for 25 years. They have been developing medicine under the embargo for so many years.
Why wasn't the return of our four American prisoners part of the deal?:
Robert Levinson, retired FBI agent
Jason Rezaian, Washington Post reporter
Amir Hekmati, former Marine
Saeed Abedini, Christian pastor
http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/ira...-freed-n391986
IRAN Nuclear talks: CHRONOLOGY
http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/iran-nuclear-talks
A senior Obama administration official, when asked about Levinson and the detained Americans, said U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry and others have had more than one conversation about the four men during this negotiating round.
"We think that this is a moment where Iran has a really important opportunity to make a humanitarian gesture and bring the Americans home," the senior administration official said.
http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-w...issing-in-iran
It takes a really special negotiator to not achieve the release of 4 of his own countrymen while having so much to give away. At least he hasn't fallen off his crutches yet [[unless the media isn't telling us everything).
Must have been a lesson learned from his boss "negotiating" with Cuba and managing to leave the incarcerated Americans there.
If you're not sure the Iran "Deal" is good or bad for America all you need to know is that UN has approved it including China and Russia - so it can't be good!
Does anyone believe that Iran will change it's ambitions to be a dominant player in that region ? Once the money starts flowing back and their economy stabilizes it will be back to square one. The hardliners are in charge. Until there is a change at the top, nothing will change. We are still the "Great Satan" to them.
^^^ Uh, yeah. The more things change the more they stay the same.
The UN is good for United States interests? China too? Say it is not so....:rolleyes:....
Quote:
Originally Posted by coracle